This Study Aims to Evaluate the Soft Tissue Response and Prosthetic Complications Associated With Three Different Types of Provisional Prosthesis Used in Immediate Loading Full-arch Implant Prosthetic Treatment. The Patients Are Randomly Assigned to the Three Groups to Compare the Clinical Outcomes

Evaluation of Soft Tissue Response and Prosthetic Complication of Three Different Provisional Prosthesis Used for Immediate Load Full Arch Implant Prosthesis. Randomized Control Clinical Trial

Status

Completed

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT07395167

Enrollment

Registered

2026-02-09

Start date

2024-02-01

Completion date

2025-04-01

Last updated

2026-02-09

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Immediate Provisional Prosthesis

Brief summary

This study aims to evaluate the soft tissue response and prosthetic complications associated with three different types of provisional prostheses used in immediate loading full-arch implant prosthetic treatment. The patients are randomly assigned to the three groups to compare the clinical outcomes and determine which provisional prosthesis provides better soft tissue health and fewer prosthetic complications

Interventions

DEVICE3D printed provisional full arch prosthesis

patients received 3D printed provisional full arch prosthesis after implant placement

DEVICEBar reinforced 3D printed provisional full arch prosthesis

patients received bar reinforced 3D printed provisional full arch prosthesis after implant placement

DEVICEMilled PMMA provisional full arch prosthesis

patients received Milled PMMA provisional full arch prosthesis after implant placement

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

50 Years to 70 Years

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

\- In good general health. Controlled systemic diseases such as well-managed diabetes or hypertension. Good oral hygiene Adequate bone quality and quantity (Type I-III bone, ≥10mm height, ≥6mm width).

Exclusion criteria

* Uncontrolled systemic diseases Bone insufficiency Active infection or periodontal disease. Pregnancy. Heavy smokers (\>10 cigarettes/day). History of previous implant failure in the same site. Immunocompromised patients (e.g., HIV, recent radiation therapy

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
clinical evaluation of dental implant (bone Level)	3 months	Evaluation included alveolar bone level around implant which is evaluated using periapical x-rays comparing T0 (at implant insertion) to T1 ( at one and half month) and T2 (at three months ) measuring amount of bone resorption around implant

Secondary

Measure	Time frame	Description
modified plaque index	3 months	the Modified Plaque Index (MPI) to assess peri-implant biofilm at four surfaces using scores from 0 (no plaque) to 3 (abundant plaque) using periodontal probe.
the Modified Gingival Index (MGI)	3 months	evaluate peri-implant soft tissue inflammation, scored from 0 (healthy mucosa) to 3 (severe inflammation)
peri-implant probing depth (PD)	3 months	measured with pressure-sensitive probes, where an increase over time indicates possible bone loss, with an ideal sulcus depth of less than 5 mm to allow effective oral hygiene

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 10, 2026